Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • You haven't returned to the thread to give us your views, but a couple of other things strike me which you should consider: 1. You say that at no time was your father's licence revoked by the DVLA. It didn't have to be revoked. It expired in September and his "entitlement to drive" (of which the licence provides proof) expired along with it. He could only continue driving whilst his application was being processed by virtue of s88, and it seems clear to me (based on what you have said) that he was not able to take advantage of the benefits provided by that section. 2. The letter he received threatening to revoke his licence was probably a template letter sent when any medical issues are brought to the attention of the DVLA. But it is clear that beyond September until it was eventually renewed, your father had no valid licence to be revoked. I believe a "not guilty" plea in court will fail. The basic facts are that your father's licence expired in September, it was not renewed until February because the DVLA were looking into his medical declaration and he could not take advantage of s88. So in December he had no licence and no entitlement to drive under s88. The facts that he believed he was fit to drive and that his licence was eventually renewed may mitigate the offence but they do not provide a defence. I also asked whether he had received a summons (very unusual these days) or whether he had received a "Single Justice Procedure Notice". The way to proceed from here differs slightly depending on what he has received so if you let me know, I'll advise further.  
    • Well, what I've read from various sources suggest if a CCJ is 6 years old that if becomes pretty much ineffective for enforcement purposes in its original form.  And that if it's about to expire then the claimant needs to apply to the court to extend the original CCJ within the final year.  Even if they do apply for an extension within the 6 years they have to have a very strong argument for doing so such as the person being out of the country or could not be traced, basically show they were actively still perusing the debt I guess. Now if a claimant ever does apply within the 6 years to extend the CCJ, would the person named on if be notified by the court that such an application has been made?.  In my case I've heard nothing from the court so assume no such application has been made.  The original CCJ in my own case is now a year beyond the 6 years of issue so must now make things even less likely again. So whilst the CCJ exists that they have not enforced it in that time must surely make it unlikely they can now take it back to court because as said it would be very rare for a judge to agree to such action now. That said, I guess they now can't use the CCJ to continue with any action for an attachment order to our mortgage either?
    • Donald Trump now banned from countries including Canada and UK as convicted felon WWW.INDEPENDENT.CO.UK There are 37 countries that bar felons from entering, even to visit.  
    • Well, they trashed their last election manifesto pledges, so nothing new really is it? They just find weasel words to try to claim they haven't actually failed if you just look at it just a little squinted and in this particular way  - and are stupid.
    • I think they're inventing stuff now. They seem to know they won't be around to implement any of it.
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like

Barclaycard PPI-Denied as ppi was taken out prior to 2001!!!!


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4052 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 139
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

I am confused about this part, surely when you go into credit, they owe you some extra money back, if you look between June 2006 and December 2010 the cc was in credit, we were making payments we would not have needed to, not just because of the ppi, but because of the interest we were being charged as there was a balance on the card, and we were paying of an actual balance that would not have been there if we were not paying the ppi, whereas if no ppi, no balance, no payment and no interest? Or am I just totally confused?

 

On another note, where do I go from here re SAR? The forty days is up on Sunday, unless I receive everything tomorrow, which I doubt, BC will not have complied. What is my next srep regarding that?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok Simple bit first

 

If they don't comply within 40 days you write and tell them they are in breach of the DPA and that you want your data within 7 days. After that time you should report to the ICO. In addition you could consider court action to force compliance and seek damages at the court's discretion.

 

When you go into credit you effectively have a savings account for a period of time. The PPI redress gives you 8% interest on those savings for that month. You will have received the interest back on the ppi charged in accordance with the compound interest column in the spreadsheet. Yes, the balance would not have been there and to compensate you they give you back the premium and the interest charged on that premium and 8% on the credit balance (if there is one).

 

When the redress calculation is complete, the norm is to refund any PPI redress to the card (if there is a balance due to them). If that then puts the card in credit they send you a payment for the difference.

 

ims

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey, I might actually be geting the hang of all this, as just realised something (or totally not getting it, if I am wrong). On the above spreadsheet, I didn't include the months from April 2007 to July 2010 as there was no balance ont the card. But, when reconstructed without ppi, there was a credit balance, so we would earn the interest on that balance for all those months....am I correct? Also, as with other card, if did go back to 1994, there would probably be a much longer period with it being in credit, again increasing that interest, right?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey, I might actually be geting the hang of all this, as just realised something (or totally not getting it, if I am wrong). On the above spreadsheet, I didn't include the months from April 2007 to July 2010 as there was no balance ont the card. But, when reconstructed without ppi, there was a credit balance, so we would earn the interest on that balance for all those months....am I correct? Why not enter them into the spreadsheet and see what effect it has? Also, as with other card, if did go back to 1994, there would probably be a much longer period with it being in credit, again increasing that interest, right? See what the spreadsheet says when you have your data

 

ims

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I apologise twice for this post, firstly am sure everyone is getting sick of me, secondly I know it is not the right forum, but hoping someone can point me in the right direction.

 

Looking at the above spreadsheet, I suddenly noticed my balances (before taking off PPI) were lower that the ones on my statements, and couldn't figure out why, as I had input payments and credits from statements exactly. Then traced it back to Mar 2011, and noticed the issue. We had purchased something, then returned it, and the card was credited, so when I did my figure for credit that month, added the amount credited with the payment made. However, the closing balance on that statement, and all up to todays, are the exact amount credited more than my balance. So it would appear that even though it is on the statement, BC never actually readjusted the balance to reflect the credit. Has anyone ever seen this happen before? How do I tackle it? Cause, taking ppi payments aside, this means from that statement, every interst amount charged was incorrect?????

Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, SAR Letter before action will be posted recorded delivery tomorrow. Just to follow up on the interest charges, and the difference between the original balance and adjusted balance, I calculated on attached spreadsheet. Not too muach on this card, but on HSBC would be a larger amount.

 

FosRunningPPI%2520v101(1)%20bc3(1).xls

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to follow up on the interest charges, and the difference between the original balance and adjusted balance, I calculated on attached spreadsheet. Not too muach on this card, but on HSBC would be a larger amount.

 

[ATTACH]32719[/ATTACH]

 

Sorry?...what is this about? don't follow

 

ims

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Am at my wits end!!!!!!!!! I just spoke to someone at ico, who said they are only concerned about the 6 year point, and if bc said all they have is the statements, then that is all they are required to send. I asked if I could enforce them to send certificates of destruction, and he said ico not addressing data destruction and would not agree they should have certificates, call fsa. I rang fsa, and they said no one regulates how uk banks should get rid of financial/personal information?????????????

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Candyapple,

 

BC have access to data beyond 6 years as shown by the cases of others. For example :-

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?286215-Barclays-want-to-start-court-action-help-please!&p=3310150&viewfull=1#post3310150

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?206050-Webby-v-Barclaycard-**WON-with-CCI-and-Older-Charges**

 

If you think there is PPI and/or default charges that you can reclaim going beyond 6 years, you can take further action with BC seeking disclosure of older a/c data.

 

See this Sticky Thread in the BC forum - http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?50148-Barclaycard-amp-Microfiche-they-are-wrong-OFFICIAL&p=3403246&viewfull=1#post3403246

 

Both the above threads resulted in older data being supplied by BC, who then went on to repay default charges plus compound interest in restitution.

 

You can use Template Letter 2 from here to demand the older data - http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/content.php?593-Data-Protection-Act-Non-Compliance-Template-Letters

 

If they fail to comply, use Letter 3 as your LBA. After that, you can file a claim at your local county court seeking nominal compensation (at the court's discretion) and an order for BC to disclose the older a/c data.

 

If you have to file a claim against BC, you will name them as Barclays Bank PLC t/a Barclaycard and use the London HQ address.

 

:-)

We could do with some help from you

                                                                PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

                                            Have we helped you ...?  Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

Please give something if you can. We all give our time free of charge but the site has bills to pay.

 

Thanks !:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Slick, very useful info, am getting onto it now. I know for sure our claim goes back to feb 1994, even BC have confirmed that is when the policy started, but as can't chase statements back longer than 6 years, don't have the figures.

 

Has anyone dealt directly with Marclay Insurance Dublin? Have tried giving them a call but number does not work, not sure if it is because I am calling from overseas???? Anyone have an international number, or any dealings with them?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...